list_skeletons

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, and the description simply restates the tool's name without disclosing scope (e.g., current scene vs. project-wide), recursion behavior, or side effects. The read-only nature is implied but not confirmed.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, front-loaded sentence of four words with no filler or redundant information. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list tool, the description is minimally viable but omits the meaning of the optional scene_path default behavior and does not clarify what the tool returns. With no output schema or annotations, this leaves some ambiguity.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already describes scene_path as 'Filter to scene' with 100% coverage, so the description adds no additional parameter meaning. Baseline 3 applies because the schema covers the parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses the verb 'List' and specifies 'Skeleton nodes', clearly indicating the operation and the resource. It is distinct from sibling tools like list_animations or read_skeleton, which target different resources or actions.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as read_skeleton or find_nodes_in_scenes. It does not mention preferred contexts or when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.